AirPods, AirPods Max and AirPods Pro Don't Support Apple Music Lossless Audio

[ebernet]

Is your question about iTunes Store? It seem like it is Apple Music only.

If your question is about ALAC and iTunes, the support for it has been for years. I convert SACD to ALAC to use it in the Apple Music app.

I think his question is will iTunes (not the replacement, the Music App) be updated. I use an Old Mac Pro (2008) as my music station with it's 24x96 optical out to my stereo. Will iTunes be updated to support 24x96 Apple music files or just continue to support only the downloaded files I have in my library...

 

[Superhai]

Perhaps they will enable bit perfect playback with tvOs 14.6... I know, I know, I´m dreaming.

Even over HDMI it is always 48 kHz. But what frustrates me a bit is that, on my Intel Mac mini I could output up to 192 kHz sampling’s frequency and 24 bit, but on the M1 Mac mini it is limited to 48 kHz over the digital interface. So there is a limit Apple consciously put on either it’s hardware or in software.

 

[pdxsurround]

For a stationary device thats okay.
But pssst, don't say that too loud, else we might see people running outside like this, just because of Apple Music lossless, with a connected DAC on their back, etc. 😄:
View attachment 1776328

For a stationary device thats okay.
But pssst, don't say that too loud, else we might see people running outside like this, just because of Apple Music lossless, with a connected DAC on their back, etc. 😄:
View attachment 1776328

It’s a hassle, but not quite THAT bad ; -).
From a hardware standpoint, I just use these 2 items to access 192/24 and 96/24 from an iPhone (and an app that supports playing those files, like VOX or Onkyo).

Not sure how the Apple player might change- or it has already already changed to support high-resolution playback.
Also- you need A LOT of space on your phone to store the files if you want to play them offline.They can be 200-300mb per song. I use a 512 GB phone and rotate the content. Store the rest in the cloud.

 

[DevNull0]

After all it's Sony's technology much like how AAC is Apple's and it sounds best on Apples devices.

AAC was developed by a consortium of companies including Sony and Microsoft, but not Apple. So AAC is actually partly Sony's technology. Interesting you think it sounds best on Apple devices and you think Sony locks down their tech to make it sound best on their devices. Oh, and just to twist the knife a little, Samsung is also part of AAC.

Cognitive dissonance can be annoying, can't it?

 

[bobenhaus]

Don't worry Apple will sell you a wired or Bluetooth adapter that will support lossless . Oh but it will cost 100 dollars for a 12 inch cable or 200 dollars for the Bluetooth adapter. Just saying.

 

[aknabi]

Nope. Blame the consumer. It's always the consumer's choice to make a purchase. Nobody forced them. This is the world of tech where things change very often. You just wanna blame Apple because it's popular to do so here even when there's no good reason to.

Or maybe consumers don't have to be so quick to buy the latest technology just to be first on the block or on YouTube with bragging rights when they could've waited a bit.

LMAO. Oh you were just kidding. Sorry I thought you were being serious.

Man those are statements that demonstrate a complete lack of knowledge of how Apple works or it’s “traditional” core product values… I’ve work with and/or for Apple since the early 80s and you’re statements are simply wrong

 

[rafark]

Over half a grand and no lossless audio lmao!

Yet people were defending Apple when these came out saying that the high price tag was due to their superior audio quality lol.

 

[Superhai]

yeah, it's all a bit confusing... are AltX and LDAC lossless, or not? The point about lossless compression is that it doesn't have anything to do with audio "quality", per se, just whether the compression allows the original data to be fully decoded—i.e., you could compress a low-res audio file using a lossless codec and the result would be exactly as sh***y as the original. Haha... The point is the "exactly" part. So are these codecs lossless?

AptX is lossy and quality around AAC AptX HD is the same but more bandwidth. LDAC has the possibility for much higher bandwidth and is able to output lossless for CD/DAB quality audio. It is however better in its lossy format, as you can send much higher quality than AAC/AptX on much higher bandwidth. It is adaptive so you don’t loose connection, it only slightly degrades the sound to avoid the stuttering on other codecs. And even the degradation sounds much better than AAC/AptX.

But the short answer is that they are not lossless.

 

[Superhai]

I think his question is will iTunes (not the replacement, the Music App) be updated. I sue an Old Mac Pro (2008) as my music station with it's 24x96 optical out to my stereo. Will iTunes be updated to support 24x96 Apple music files or just continue to support only the downloaded files I have in my library...

iTunes does support 24/96kHz ALAC and have been doing that for a long time. Not sure if it did all the way since the inception of ALAC, but not long after.

 

[Octopuss]

Muahaha, so long good old Apple, viva new crappy Apple

 

[rafark]

Anyone buying these products doesn't care about audio quality. Pretty simple. Everyone knows even the AirPods Max don't support the right codecs.

I get that but why so expensive then? You can say that these are way overpriced for the value they provide.

I mean I like most Apple products but a lot of times it feels like Apple is robbing its customers.

 

[Apleeseed84]

I get that but why so expensive then? You can say that these are way overpriced for the value they provide.

I mean I like most Apple products but a lot of times it feels like Apple is robbing its customers.

There was a point in time where having an ipod was the best audio player back in the day, now with the iphone and better tech seems like we are still held back a lot to be honest. Bluetooth headphones are all about DRM, they can control and not play music if they really wanted to, same with HDMI, there was no control over analog devices back in the day, Apple can also tell you yes, spatial sound and Dolby Atmos to which people will be satisfied with to be honest, lossless requires too much bandwidth on bluetooth and will need a digital amplifier if anything. We still can't customize our EQ and are forced presets but we as consumers never get a choice on stuff we really want like:

the old school iTunes Visualizer lmao

 

[DevNull0]

I get that but why so expensive then? You can say that these are way overpriced for the value they provide.

I mean I like most Apple products but a lot of times it feels like Apple is robbing its customers.

You're asking why an Apple product with very limited quality and features is priced at a premium over other much higher quality products that are missing that shiny Apple logo?

All the fanatics around here love to brag about Apple's fat juicy margins like it's somehow good for the consumer and proves Apple is best. You don't fatten up those margins by using premium parts on your product and you don't fatten up those margins by charging a price that makes sense with all the corners you cut on product quality.

 

[aidler]

I simply have no words to describe the stupidity of Apple to remove the headphone jack years ago. KEKW... simply KEKW

 

[MNTVJunkie]

Lossless audio is like a zip file for audio. If each time you expanded your word file and re-saved it you lost a few letters and words, well that would be unacceptable, right? When you rip a CD to mp3 or m4a, you lose a certain amount of audio but save a lot of space. If you expand it back to CD resolution and compress it again, each time you will lose more of the sound. If you compress and expand a zip file again and again you will end up with this same thing. Think of JPEG vs Bitmap. You probably won't see the difference, but JPEG will lose something each time you re-save it. Lossless audio will not lose any of the information in the original file....

Best example of this:

 

[Onelifenofear]

Anyone buying these products doesn't care about audio quality. Pretty simple. Everyone knows even the AirPods Max don't support the right codecs.

explain the codecs then.

LDAC is near lossless but still compressed and is about 900kbs
Lossless could be up to 9,216 kbps - but likely nearer 4000 kbps

Bluetooth 5 maxes about 2,000 under perfect circumstances.

This is Bluetooth limitations. nothing to do with Apple.

 

[Ansath]

What if I used the 3.5mm to lightning cable to connect APM to a CD player? Does APM support lossless? Unless the ADC and DAC in that combo is less than 16bit/44.1kHz (Apple would have had to try really hard to cheap out that badly), then the answer is technically yes.

And the lightning to 3.5mm dongle has a standard DAC in it, so it also supports lossless (16bit/44.1kHz) as well. What it doesn't support is the high resolution or high sample rate (>48kHz) lossless.

You’re assuming that Apple will let the Music app output in the format you expect via the lightning port.

until either Apple confirm it, or someone can check it when Apple Music enables access to lossless in June, then it’s just guesswork. That’s the point I’m getting at.

 

[grumnz]

truth is Apple is going to use LC3 soon

finally - someone who gets it!

 

[dojoman]

Most of you probably can't even tell the difference between lossless vs lossy audio quality me included.

 

[stuckwithme247]

I have been playing lossless audio tracks over Bluetooth for over 5 years. I have Amazon Music HD (before had Tidal HD) in addition to Apple Music. I care about audio quality, and still hear an improvement in fidelity despite BT's compression.

The only reasoning that makes sense is they are trying to sell more hardware products.

 

[Superhai]

Lossless could be up to 9,216 kbps - but likely nearer 4000 kbps

Bluetooth 5 maxes about 2,000 under perfect circumstances.

This is Bluetooth limitations. nothing to do with Apple.

It is BT limitations for sure, but your figures for lossless is not there. Hi-res Audio for sure but lossless don’t have to be hi-res. Remember that hi-res audio can be in surround, multi channel SACD is common so there are several recordings. There is also Dolby TrueHd if you really want to be on the bandwagon.

Lossless Stereo CD quality is not above (2 * 16 * 44100 = 1411200) 1411 kbit/s. ALAC compresses to between 40 to 60%. So you need 600-900 kbit/s. Now you also need more overhead for protocols and how BT work.

Apple is working on extending Bluetooth audio to 8 Mbit/s so in future it may be possible.

 

[powerbook911]

I'm confused. When you use Amazon Music HD or Tidal, you hear the difference with AirPods because it isn't going through TWO compressions, only one (when your phone/Mac send it to your ears).

Is Apple going to specifically block the Apple Lossless from playing if you're using AirPods? If so, this is a pointless offering.

 

[Royksöpp]

It's not a flop whatsoever if you use capable equipment.

BRB let me go to Best Buy to purchase a grand worth of equipment.

 

[Superhai]

Is Apple going to specifically block the Apple Lossless from playing if you're using AirPods? If so, this is a pointless offering.

No you can play it, like you can play lossless files today, but it will not remain lossless when decoded by the DAC in the AirPods. It will likely sound better as you point out, one less lossy conversion.

 

[dwaite]

wow £549.00! Headphones don’t support it but I bet every set of high end earphones with a 3.5mm jack made in the last 20 or so years will!

Analog is lossy too.